Criminal Law Topics Flashcards
1
Q
Factual Causation
A
But for test
2
Q
Causation
A
Factual Cause- But for test
Legal Cause - Operating and substantial cause
3
Q
Thin Skull Rule
A
Take Victim as you find them
4
Q
What are the four different types of Fault
A
DirectIndirect (Oblique intent)RecklessnessNegligence
5
Q
Transferred Malice
A
Mens Rea is moved from intended victim to actual victim
6
Q
Coincidence Rule
A
Actus Reus and Mens Rea must happen at the same time
Fagan V MPC
7
Q
No Fault + Strict Liability
A
A level of blameworthiness
8
Q
Absolute Liability
A
No Mens Rea is required
9
Q
Strict Liability
A
Mens rea is not required in at least one aspect of the Actus Reus. actus Reus is voluntary
10
Q
Gammon Test
A
Presumption of Mens Rea: Can only be refused by a clear word in statue or by implication Presumption is strong when Truly Criminal Presumption is displaced if issue is one of social concern or public issue encourages greater vigilance
11
Q
Recklessness
A
Foresight of harm being possible
12
Q
Negligence
A
Falling below standard of reasonable man
13
Q
Actus Reus for Assault
A
To cause
The apprehension or causing V to apprehend
Immediate unlawful force
14
Q
Mens Rea for Assault
A
An Intention or Recklessness as to causing the victim to apprehend unlawful+ Immediate force being applied
15
Q
Actus Reus for Battery
A
Unlawful application of force upon another person
16
Q
Mens Rea for Battery
A
An Intention or recklessness as to unlawful force being applied
17
Q
S. 47 Actus Reus
A
There must be an assault or battery causing the consequence.
Harm: Injury
Actual: Wholly insignificant
18
Q
S.47 Mens Rea
A
Intention or recklessness as to assault or battery
19
Q
S.20 Actus Reus
A
Unlawful wounding or GBH upon another person
20
Q
S.20 Mens Rea
A
Intention or recklessness to causing some minor harm
R V Parmenter
21
Q
S.18 GBH Actus Reus
A
Wounding or GBH provided in S.20
22
Q
S.18 GBH Intent Mens Rea
A
Intentionally (Direct/Indirect) causing GBH
Or Intent to Resist/Prevent lawful arrest
Plus recklessness to causing injury
23
Q
Correspondence Rule
A
Mens Rea must match the Actus Reus as result the degree of fault corresponded with the offence and punishment
24
Q
Murder Actus Reus
A
The unlawful killing of a reasonable person in being under the kings peace
25
Murder Mens Rea
With Malice aforethought expressed or implied. Intention to causing GBH
26
Voluntary Manslaughter
Same as murder but with:
Loss of Control
Diminished responsibility
27
Burden Of Proof
This is when sufficient evidence is given to raise on issue of the defence.
28
Loss Of Control
Can not be convicted of murder if:
Happened from loss of self control
Can Not be applied for considered revenge
29
# Loss of control
Qualifying trigger
Fear of serious violence
Things done or said
Justifiable sense of being seriously wronged
30
# Loss of control
Objective test
If Person of D sex and age with normal degree of tolerance and self restraint would behave the same way.
31
Legal Causation
Is defendants act the operating and substantial cause
32
What is included in basic intent
Assault, battery, ABH , GBH(s.20), Involuntary manslaughter
33
What is included in specific intent
Theft, Robbery, GBHs.18,Murder
34
What are the two types of Involuntary manslaughter
Gross Negligence Manslaughter
Unlawful Act Manslaughter
35
Gross Negligence Manslaughter
Test(Case)
Bateman: Does the conduct of the accused show such disregard for the life and safety of others as to amount to a crime
36
Gross Negligence Manslaughter
| What must be shown
Duty of care must exist between D and V
Must be a breach of duty which causes death
Is such that is considered criminal by the jury
37
GNM Mens Rea
D has the Intention or recklessness as to causing an dangerous situation
38
Unlawful Act Manslaughter
| What must be Proven
Must prove that D committed an act that was:
Unlawful
Dangerous
One that causes death
39
Unlawful Act
Has to be a criminal offence
Can not be an omission
40
Unlawful Act Objective test
Sober and reasonable person
Some harm
Harm not be aimed at the victim
Harm foreseen must be physical harm
| R V Church
41
Unlawful Act Subjective test
The unlawful act must have been accompanied by the Mens Rea to commit that crime. They do not need intention to cause harm
42
Theft
Dishonestly appropriating property belonging to another. With the intention of permanently depriving
43
Appropriation
This is the assumption by a person of the rights of an owner
44
Theft S.5
Belonging to another
Property shall be regarded as belonging to any person having possession or control of it or having in it any proprietary interest
45
Theft S.5 (2)
Where property is subject to trust the person whom it belongs shall be regarded as including any person having a right to enforce the trust and an intention to defeat the the trust shall be regarded accordingly as an intention to deprive
46
Theft S.5(3)
Where a person receives property from or on account of another and is under obligation to the other to retain and deal with that property or its proceeds shall be regarded as belonging to the other
47
Theft S.5(4)
Where a person gets property by another's mistake and is under obligation to make restoration of the property or its proceeds or of the value thereof If not will be held as intention to permanently deprive
48
Theft S.3(1)
Any assumption by a person of the rights of the owner amounts to appropriation and this includes where he has come by the property without stealing it
49
Theft S.3(2)
Where property or a right or interest in property is or purports to be transferred for value to a person acting in good faith.
50
Theft S.4(1)
Property includes money and all other property including real or personal including things in action and other intangible property
51
Theft S.4(2)
| Property
A person can not steal land or things forming part of land and severed from it by him or his directions
52
Theft S.3(3)
| Appropiation
A person who picks mushrooms growing on wild on any land, or picks flowers ,fruit ,foulage from a plant steals what he picks unless he does it for reward or for sale or other commercial purpose
53
Theft S.6(1)
A person appropriating property belonging to another without meaning the other permanently to lose the thing itself is nevertheless to be regarded as having the intention to permanently depriving the other. This applies for borrowing and lending
54
Robbery
s.8(1)
A person is guilty of robbery if he steals and immediately before or at the time of doing so and in order to due so he uses force on any person or puts or seek to put any person in fear of being subjected to force
55
# Capacity defence
Insanity- M'Naughten Rules
| What are the steps
Defect of reason
Caused by disease of the mind
So that the defendant does not know that the nature and quality of his actions was wrong
56
# Capacity Defences
Automatisim
| What are the steps
Involuntary Act
Due to an external factor
57
# Capacity Defences
Intoxication
| What are the steps
Voluntary or involuntary
Basic or specific
58
# Capacity Defence
Insanity- What is the defect of reason
Inability to use reason
59
# Capacity Defence
Insanity- Caused by disease of the mind
Must be an physical disease not external factor
| (R V Hennessy) (R V Bratty) (R V Kemp)
60
# Theft
S.2
S.2(1)
1. If he appropiates the property in the belief that he has in law the right to deprive the other of it on behalf of himself or a third party
2. If he appropiates property in the belief that he would have the others consent if the other knew of the appropiation and the circumstances
3. If he appropiates property in the belief that the person to whom the property belongs cannot be discovered by taking resonable steps
61
# Capacity Defence
Insanity- So that D does not know that nature of his act was wrong
Prove he did not know what he was doing
That he did not appreciate the conseqenuces of his actions
Did not appreciate the circumstances in which he was acting
| (R V Oye) (R V Windle) (R V Johnson)
62
# Capacity Defence
Automatism-Involuntary act
This means the D's mind is not controlling his limbs in a purposeful manner (Similar to R V Bratty)
63
# Capacity Defence
Automatism-External factor
Blow to the head, Attacked by a swarm of bees, Sneezing fit or hypnotism
64
# Capacity Defence
Automatism-Self induced
Does D know that this conduct will bring an automatic state ? Can not be reckless into going into this state
65
What are the three necsessity Defences
Self defence/Prevention of crime
Duress by threat
Duress by circumstance
66
# Necessity Defence-Prevention of crime
Criminal Law Act S.3
A Person may use such force as is reasonable in the circumstance in the prevention of crime or in effecting or assisting in the lawful arrest of offenders or suspected offenders.
67
# Necessity Defence-Self Defence/Prevention of crime
Necessity of force
Force is not justified unless it is necessary. It will be necessary if it is seen to be in the circumstances which exist or which the D genuinely believed existed. Works even if the attack is imminent
Can not rely on drunken mistake (s.76(5))
| Gladstone V Williams
68
# Necessity Defence-Self Defence/Prevention of crime
Reasonableness of force
The facts as D believed them.
Circumstances of attack
Time D had avaliable to decide on course of action
D Balanced against risk of harm to the victim
| (R V Bird) (R V Clegg)
69
# Necessity Defence-Self Defence/Prevention of crime
Householders
| What must be shown
Force used whilst D was in or partly in the house
D was not a tresspasser
D must believe V to be a tresspasser.
70
# Necessity Defence-Self Defence/Prevention of crime
Householders Test
| Reasonableness
Was degree of force grossly disproprtionate
If no
Was the degree of force reasonable
| (R V Ray)-Not reasonable
71
# Necessity Defence-Duress
Duress by Threat
| Graham Test
* Was D compelled to act as he did because he feared death or serious physical injury.
* If so, did he respond as a sober person of reasonable firmness sharing the characteristics of D would have done
* Confirmed by Hassan 2005
72
# Necessity Defence-Duress
The nature of threat
Must relate to death or serious injury.
* Psychological harm will not do
* Sereve pain will be insufficent
* Can be to immediate family member or someone you would regard yourself as responsible for
* Must relate to the offence that is commited (R V Cole)
| R V Valderama-Vega
73
# Necessity Defence-Duress
Characteristics of the defendant
* IQ not releveant unless it is a mental impairment
* Being pliable, vunerable, timid are not relevant
* Characteristics due to self induced abuse such as alcohol or drugs
* Age and gender relevant
* Physical helath and disabilty relevant
* Mental illness, impairment or psychatric condition provided making them more susceptible
| Bowen
74
# Necessity Defence-Duress
Immediacy of threat and possible escape
Can only plead if the threat was operating on his mind at the time of the offence and feared death or serious harm
* Hudson V Taylor- Immediacy after Trial
* Abdul Hussain- Immediacy could be sometime soon "overbearing their minds"
* R V Gill & R V Hasan- If you can go to the police you can not rely on duress
75
# Necessity Defence-Duress
Self Induced Duress
Where the D put themselves in a position that makes them more likely to be subjected to threats duress is less likely to be available
| R V Sharp
76
# Necessity Defence-Duress
Duress of Circumstance
| When does it occur
Arises when the D believes that unless he acted the way he did either he or those around him would suffer death or serious injury
| R V Martin
77
# Necessity Defence-Duress
Duress of Circumstance Test
1. May he have been impelled to act as he did as believed in he was in a situation that death or serious phycical injury would result from
2. May a sober person with reasonable firmness sharing characteristics of the accused have responded in the same way
78
# Necessity Defence-Duress
Objective nature of threat
Reasoanble and proportionate action
* Threat must be veiwed as it would be by a reasonable man
* Jury would consider if it was proportionate
79
# Attempts
What is going beyond mere preperation
1. Whether the D's last act was necessary ( Stonehouse)
2. Is D's act proximate to the commision of the full offence
3. Is D's act one of a series that was lead to a crime if uninterrupted ( Gullefer)
4. Is D's act immediatley connected with the substantive offence
80
# Attempt
S.1 CAA 1981
If with intent to commit an offence to which this section applies a person does an act which is more than merley preparatory to the commission of the offence he is guilty of attempting to commit the offence
81
# Attempts
Intent
The D must intend ( Direct intent- Mohan) the act
The D must also have intention as to the criminal consequence. This can be direct intent or oblique intent
82
# Attempts
Impossibility
* Under CAA 1981 s.1(2) attempts can be commited even where an offence is impossible
* CAA 1981 s.1(3)- This refers to instances where the D has mistaken belief but had it been accurate then they would have committed and attempt
